我们能不能让人们在开始升降前不用弯着腰就能够到更低的地方?考察起跑脚和躯干位置对到达深度的影响。

IF 2 3区 工程技术 Q3 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL Ergonomics Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-17 DOI:10.1080/00140139.2023.2282953
Danielle R Carnegie, Steven M Hirsch, Samuel J Howarth, Tyson A C Beach
{"title":"我们能不能让人们在开始升降前不用弯着腰就能够到更低的地方?考察起跑脚和躯干位置对到达深度的影响。","authors":"Danielle R Carnegie, Steven M Hirsch, Samuel J Howarth, Tyson A C Beach","doi":"10.1080/00140139.2023.2282953","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There is disagreement regarding the efficacy of 'safe' lifting recommendations for reducing low back disorder risk. These recommendations commonly focus on minimising lumbar spine flexion, which limits the range of allowable starting lift positions for that person. This study evaluated whether starting postural adaptations could allow a person to reach down further without rounding their lumbar spine before beginning a lift. Reach displacement was measured as participants performed a series of maximal reach tasks under different combinations of stance width, foot orientation and trunk inclination, with their lumbar spine motion restricted. There were no interactions between any of the three postural adaptations or any effect of stance width or trunk inclination. Seventy-nine percent of participants achieved their greatest reach displacement with their feet externally rotated, which contributed to a 4 cm greater reach displacement compared to a neutral foot orientation (<i>p</i> < 0.001).<b>Practitioner summary:</b> This study examined whether aspects of initial posture could influence the ability to adhere to 'safe' lifting recommendations across a range of lift heights. As a component of lifting (re)training interventions, practitioners should consider starting lift posture adaptations (e.g. manipulating foot external rotation) to improve capacity to adhere to recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":50503,"journal":{"name":"Ergonomics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can we enable individuals to reach further down without rounding their backs before beginning a lift? Examining the influence of starting foot and trunk position on reach depth.\",\"authors\":\"Danielle R Carnegie, Steven M Hirsch, Samuel J Howarth, Tyson A C Beach\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00140139.2023.2282953\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>There is disagreement regarding the efficacy of 'safe' lifting recommendations for reducing low back disorder risk. These recommendations commonly focus on minimising lumbar spine flexion, which limits the range of allowable starting lift positions for that person. This study evaluated whether starting postural adaptations could allow a person to reach down further without rounding their lumbar spine before beginning a lift. Reach displacement was measured as participants performed a series of maximal reach tasks under different combinations of stance width, foot orientation and trunk inclination, with their lumbar spine motion restricted. There were no interactions between any of the three postural adaptations or any effect of stance width or trunk inclination. Seventy-nine percent of participants achieved their greatest reach displacement with their feet externally rotated, which contributed to a 4 cm greater reach displacement compared to a neutral foot orientation (<i>p</i> < 0.001).<b>Practitioner summary:</b> This study examined whether aspects of initial posture could influence the ability to adhere to 'safe' lifting recommendations across a range of lift heights. As a component of lifting (re)training interventions, practitioners should consider starting lift posture adaptations (e.g. manipulating foot external rotation) to improve capacity to adhere to recommendations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ergonomics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ergonomics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2023.2282953\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ergonomics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2023.2282953","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于“安全”举重建议对降低腰背部疾病风险的有效性存在分歧。这些建议通常集中在尽量减少腰椎屈曲,这限制了人们允许的开始举重姿势的范围。这项研究评估了开始姿势适应是否可以让人在开始举重前进一步伸手而不使腰椎弯曲。在腰椎运动受限的情况下,受试者在不同的站位宽度、足部朝向和躯干倾斜度组合下完成一系列最大够远任务,测量够远位移。三种体位适应之间没有相互作用,也没有任何立场宽度或躯干倾斜的影响。79%的参与者在脚向外旋转的情况下达到了最大的到达位移,与脚的中性方向相比,这使得到达位移增加了4厘米
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Can we enable individuals to reach further down without rounding their backs before beginning a lift? Examining the influence of starting foot and trunk position on reach depth.

There is disagreement regarding the efficacy of 'safe' lifting recommendations for reducing low back disorder risk. These recommendations commonly focus on minimising lumbar spine flexion, which limits the range of allowable starting lift positions for that person. This study evaluated whether starting postural adaptations could allow a person to reach down further without rounding their lumbar spine before beginning a lift. Reach displacement was measured as participants performed a series of maximal reach tasks under different combinations of stance width, foot orientation and trunk inclination, with their lumbar spine motion restricted. There were no interactions between any of the three postural adaptations or any effect of stance width or trunk inclination. Seventy-nine percent of participants achieved their greatest reach displacement with their feet externally rotated, which contributed to a 4 cm greater reach displacement compared to a neutral foot orientation (p < 0.001).Practitioner summary: This study examined whether aspects of initial posture could influence the ability to adhere to 'safe' lifting recommendations across a range of lift heights. As a component of lifting (re)training interventions, practitioners should consider starting lift posture adaptations (e.g. manipulating foot external rotation) to improve capacity to adhere to recommendations.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ergonomics
Ergonomics 工程技术-工程:工业
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
147
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Ergonomics, also known as human factors, is the scientific discipline that seeks to understand and improve human interactions with products, equipment, environments and systems. Drawing upon human biology, psychology, engineering and design, Ergonomics aims to develop and apply knowledge and techniques to optimise system performance, whilst protecting the health, safety and well-being of individuals involved. The attention of ergonomics extends across work, leisure and other aspects of our daily lives. The journal Ergonomics is an international refereed publication, with a 60 year tradition of disseminating high quality research. Original submissions, both theoretical and applied, are invited from across the subject, including physical, cognitive, organisational and environmental ergonomics. Papers reporting the findings of research from cognate disciplines are also welcome, where these contribute to understanding equipment, tasks, jobs, systems and environments and the corresponding needs, abilities and limitations of people. All published research articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymous refereeing by independent expert referees.
期刊最新文献
The effect of font boldness, noise disturbance and time pressure on human error in the context of cloud change operation. How flight experience impacts pilots' decision-making and visual scanning pattern in low-visibility approaches: preliminary evidence from eye tracking. The comfort and functional performance of personal protective equipment for police officers: a systematic scoping review. Virtual fit and design improvements of a filtering half-mask for sub-adult wearers. The impact of remote work using mobile information and communication technologies on physical health: a systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1